Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
to be the low tax small government party. the other party leadership proposes, wait for it, $800 billion in tax increases. it's noted that the democrats have celebrated the proposal put out by president obama. meanwhile, you have a number of republicans slamming speaker boehner. how would you describe his position right now? >> well, he really didn't win for losing. he's trying to say to president obama if i wanted topaz your proposal i can't do it. he's really truly between a deal and promise and getting the fight over with and a conference that won't allow it. i think what senator demint is saying and house republicans are saying to john boehner is, let's go over the cliff. that we can live with the sequester and we absolutely will not raise tax rates no matter what. what that does is eliminate all of the tax cuts and then there's a new fight in january to push obviously by the democrats to restore tax cuts for 98% of americans. and then that will be muddied by the need for a debt ceiling increase and the fight goes in to february. it's government at the brink all the time. we don't know how
are dysfunctional and cannot govern, et cetera, et cetera. in terms of dealing with the policy problem, which is you have this massive and growing debt, you have to bring in more revenues. there's multiple ways to do it, but critical ways to raise rates on the top end. it was what the election was about. republicans want to play the game where they think they get something. at the end of the day they lose worse if we go over the cliff. >> that's an interesting insight because you have alan simpson on the "today" show asked dp one side is a winner or loser off the cliff. here's what he had to say, chris. >> when you have leaders from the administration saying i think it's to the advantage of the democrats to go off the cliff or i think it's an advantage of the republicans to go off the cliff or the president to go off the cliff, that's like betting your country. there's stupidity involved in that. >> chris? >> well, listen, you know, i'm not saying it's necessarily the best policy course. i wish people could sit down and negotiate this, but at the end of the day think about it from the president's pe
legalization. you must come out of the shadows and register with the government and go through a criminal background check. if you have a criminal background, you get deported. no tolerance for that. after you go to that criminal background check, if you have no criminal background, you must pay back taxes you may have earn and not paid. you must also learn english which is the first time for permanent residency that we require an english language requirement. you must wait your turn as those who have been waiting under the legal process get ultimately appointed first to their permanent residency and you get at the end of the line. if you maintained a good standing in our society during this period of time, you have a chance at permanent residency. >> what about the ideas according to the article that some leaders are perhaps cutting it up into smaller bills. in a sense what we are talking about with the fiscal cliff where there may be a deal on tax rates and later next year deal with entitlements in the deficits and debt ceiling and the other issues facing us. would you support backing a
is that you do, whether the states or federal governments do it or insurance companies, you have a lot of infrastructure spending as people rebuild from the wreckage. you had 20,000 less construction jobs last month. that's likely to be a 20,000-plus or more just to rebuild new jersey alone. you have that. by the way, we haven't talked about the defense cuts that go into effect on january 1, which is truly massive. those have a negative effect on the sector exposed to it and jobs there. >> really quickly now. i love having you on because you have the ability to simplify fairly complex questions. i'm going to give you one here. republicans generalliy argue tht raising taxes will hurt the economy. is there any clear indication there will be job losses if tax rates go up 2, 3 percentage points. >> no matter how editorials you read arguing that case, there's no clear-cut evidence there's any clear-cut connection between marginally higher rates or lower growth over the past 50, 60 years. >> the correlation is not definitive? >> yes. >> zachary, thank you so mesh. blake, always a pleasure. l
programs are successful which has been prooufb they're success it undercuts their view that government can't do anything right. >> is there a fear factor of democrats at this point if it's done in a small ball version versus a long ball version? >> yes, there is. i have to admit i'm a card carrying member of the sherrod brown fan club and he represents a breed of democrat that's proudly progressive and doesn't want to ceded ground to republicans but i think the president has to give boehner, speaker boehner, some ammunition with which to go back to the republicans in the house and say, look, the president is not getting everything he wants in this either. if he doesn't provide the republicans that kind of cover, that does in my view jeopardize a deal. that having been said, i think we are certainly seeing that republicans in the house and in the senate are agreeing in principle to allowing the top 2% tax bracket to increase and that's precisely what the president had laid down as his muffin greed cent. he said i will not sign an agreement that doesn't include that. i tend to think that sen
responsibility and opportunity and liberties and limited but effective government and these types of thing it is a resonate with voters we have done a poor job of talking about the core principles for policies and communica communicate. >> probably people wish you were one of the five co-chairs of the group. always a pleasure. thank you so much. >> thank you. >>> up next, the latest on former south african president mandela. he has a lung infection and been in the hospital for three days. we have the latest in a live report. [ male announcer ] this is bob, a regular guy with an irregular heartbeat. the usual, bob? not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left. i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib n
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)